Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Marketing Letters 3/2014

01.09.2014

Beware of black swans: Taking stock of the description–experience gap in decision under uncertainty

verfasst von: André de Palma, Mohammed Abdellaoui, Giuseppe Attanasi, Moshe Ben-Akiva, Ido Erev, Helga Fehr-Duda, Dennis Fok, Craig R. Fox, Ralph Hertwig, Nathalie Picard, Peter P. Wakker, Joan L. Walker, Martin Weber

Erschienen in: Marketing Letters | Ausgabe 3/2014

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Uncertainty pervades most aspects of life. From selecting a new technology to choosing a career, decision makers rarely know in advance the exact outcomes of their decisions. Whereas the consequences of decisions in standard decision theory are explicitly described (the decision from description (DFD) paradigm), the consequences of decisions in the recent decision from experience (DFE) paradigm are learned from experience. In DFD, decision makers typically overrespond to rare events. That is, rare events have more impact on decisions than their objective probabilities warrant (overweighting). In DFE, decision makers typically exhibit the opposite pattern, underresponding to rare events. That is, rare events may have less impact on decisions than their objective probabilities warrant (underweighting). In extreme cases, rare events are completely neglected, a pattern known as the “Black Swan effect.” This contrast between DFD and DFE is known as a description–experience gap. In this paper, we discuss several tentative interpretations arising from our interdisciplinary examination of this gap. First, while a source of underweighting of rare events in DFE may be sampling error, we observe that a robust description–experience gap remains when these factors are not at play. Second, the residual description–experience gap is not only about experience per se but also about the way in which information concerning the probability distribution over the outcomes is learned in DFE. Econometric error theories may reveal that different assumed error structures in DFD and DFE also contribute to the gap.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Abdellaoui, M., Baillon, A., Placido, L., & Wakker, P. P. (2011a). The rich domain of uncertainty: source functions and their experimental implementation. American Economic Review, 101, 699–727. Abdellaoui, M., Baillon, A., Placido, L., & Wakker, P. P. (2011a). The rich domain of uncertainty: source functions and their experimental implementation. American Economic Review, 101, 699–727.
Zurück zum Zitat Abdellaoui, M., l’Haridon, O., & Paraschiv, C. (2011b). Experienced vs. described uncertainty: do we need two prospect theory specifications? Management Science, 57, 1879–1895.CrossRef Abdellaoui, M., l’Haridon, O., & Paraschiv, C. (2011b). Experienced vs. described uncertainty: do we need two prospect theory specifications? Management Science, 57, 1879–1895.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l’école américaine. Econometrica, 21, 503–546.CrossRef Allais, M. (1953). Le comportement de l’homme rationnel devant le risque: critique des postulats et axiomes de l’école américaine. Econometrica, 21, 503–546.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215–233.CrossRef Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2003). Small feedback-based decisions and their limited correspondence to description-based decisions. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 16, 215–233.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ben-Akiva, M., de Palma, A., McFadden, D., Abou-Zeid, M., Chiappori, P. A., de Lapparent, M., et al. (2012). Process and context in choice models. Marketing Letters, 23, 439–456.CrossRef Ben-Akiva, M., de Palma, A., McFadden, D., Abou-Zeid, M., Chiappori, P. A., de Lapparent, M., et al. (2012). Process and context in choice models. Marketing Letters, 23, 439–456.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Camerer, C., & Weber, M. (1992). Recent development in modeling preferences: uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 325–370.CrossRef Camerer, C., & Weber, M. (1992). Recent development in modeling preferences: uncertainty and ambiguity. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 325–370.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat de Palma, A., & Picard, N. (2010). Measuring individual-specific risk aversion, loss aversion and probability weighting. Unpublished manuscript, Paris Ecole Polytechnique. de Palma, A., & Picard, N. (2010). Measuring individual-specific risk aversion, loss aversion and probability weighting. Unpublished manuscript, Paris Ecole Polytechnique.
Zurück zum Zitat de Palma, A., Picard, N., & Ziegelmeyer, A. (2011). Individual and couple decision behavior under risk: evidence on the dynamics of power balance. Theory and Decision, 70, 45–64.CrossRef de Palma, A., Picard, N., & Ziegelmeyer, A. (2011). Individual and couple decision behavior under risk: evidence on the dynamics of power balance. Theory and Decision, 70, 45–64.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Dimmock, S. G., Kouwenberg, R., Mitchell, O. S., & Peijnenburg, K. (2013). Ambiguity aversion and household portfolio choice: empirical evidence. Unpublished manuscript, NBER. Dimmock, S. G., Kouwenberg, R., Mitchell, O. S., & Peijnenburg, K. (2013). Ambiguity aversion and household portfolio choice: empirical evidence. Unpublished manuscript, NBER.
Zurück zum Zitat Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643–669.CrossRef Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity and the Savage axioms. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75, 643–669.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Erev, I., Glozman, I., & Hertwig, R. (2008). What impacts the impact of rare events. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 153–177.CrossRef Erev, I., Glozman, I., & Hertwig, R. (2008). What impacts the impact of rare events. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 36, 153–177.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Erev, I., Ert, E., & Roth, A. E. (2010a). A choice prediction competition for market entry games: an introduction. Games, 1, 117–136.CrossRef Erev, I., Ert, E., & Roth, A. E. (2010a). A choice prediction competition for market entry games: an introduction. Games, 1, 117–136.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Erev, I., Ert, E., Roth, A. E., Haruvy, E., Herzog, S. M., Hau, R., et al. (2010b). A choice prediction competition: choices from experience and from description. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 15–47.CrossRef Erev, I., Ert, E., Roth, A. E., Haruvy, E., Herzog, S. M., Hau, R., et al. (2010b). A choice prediction competition: choices from experience and from description. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 15–47.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fehr-Duda, H., & Epper, T. (2012). Probability and risk: foundations and economic implications of probability-dependent risk preferences. Annual Review of Economics, 4, 567–593.CrossRef Fehr-Duda, H., & Epper, T. (2012). Probability and risk: foundations and economic implications of probability-dependent risk preferences. Annual Review of Economics, 4, 567–593.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fehr-Duda, H., Bruhin, A., Epper, T., & Schubert, R. (2010). Rationality on the rise: why relative risk aversion increases with stake size. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40, 147–180.CrossRef Fehr-Duda, H., Bruhin, A., Epper, T., & Schubert, R. (2010). Rationality on the rise: why relative risk aversion increases with stake size. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 40, 147–180.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., & Hadar, L. (2006). “Decisions from experience” = sampling error plus prospect theory: reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev (2004). Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 159–161. Fox, C. R., & Hadar, L. (2006). “Decisions from experience” = sampling error plus prospect theory: reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev (2004). Judgment and Decision Making, 2, 159–161.
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., & See, K. E. (2003). Belief and preference in decision under uncertainty. In D. Hardman & L. Macchi (Eds.), Thinking: current perspectives on reasoning, judgment, and decision making (pp. 273–314). Hoboken: Wiley. Fox, C. R., & See, K. E. (2003). Belief and preference in decision under uncertainty. In D. Hardman & L. Macchi (Eds.), Thinking: current perspectives on reasoning, judgment, and decision making (pp. 273–314). Hoboken: Wiley.
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1995). Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 585–603.CrossRef Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1995). Ambiguity aversion and comparative ignorance. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 110, 585–603.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1998). A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Science, 44, 879–895.CrossRef Fox, C. R., & Tversky, A. (1998). A belief-based account of decision under uncertainty. Management Science, 44, 879–895.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., & Weber, M. (2002). Ambiguity aversion, comparative ignorance and decision context. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 476–498.CrossRef Fox, C. R., & Weber, M. (2002). Ambiguity aversion, comparative ignorance and decision context. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 88, 476–498.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Fox, C. R., Long, A., Hadar, L., & Erner, C. (2013). Unpacking decisions from description and experience. Unpublished manuscript, UCLA Anderson School of Management. Fox, C. R., Long, A., Hadar, L., & Erner, C. (2013). Unpacking decisions from description and experience. Unpublished manuscript, UCLA Anderson School of Management.
Zurück zum Zitat Gonzalez, C., & Gutt, V. (2011). Instance-based learning: integrating sampling and repeated decisions form experience. Psychological Review, 118, 523–551.CrossRef Gonzalez, C., & Gutt, V. (2011). Instance-based learning: integrating sampling and repeated decisions form experience. Psychological Review, 118, 523–551.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hadar, L., & Fox, C. R. (2009). Information asymmetry in decisions from description versus decisions from experience. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 317–325. Hadar, L., & Fox, C. R. (2009). Information asymmetry in decisions from description versus decisions from experience. Judgment and Decision Making, 4, 317–325.
Zurück zum Zitat Hasher, L., & Zachs, L. T. (1984). Automatic processing of fundamental information: the case of frequency of occurrence. American Psychologist, 39, 1372–1388.CrossRef Hasher, L., & Zachs, L. T. (1984). Automatic processing of fundamental information: the case of frequency of occurrence. American Psychologist, 39, 1372–1388.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Heath, C., & Tversky, A. (1991). Preference and belief: ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4, 5–28.CrossRef Heath, C., & Tversky, A. (1991). Preference and belief: ambiguity and competence in choice under uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 4, 5–28.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hertwig, R., & Erev, I. (2009). The description-experience gap in risky choice. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13, 517–523.CrossRef Hertwig, R., & Erev, I. (2009). The description-experience gap in risky choice. Trends in Cognitive Science, 13, 517–523.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15, 534–539.CrossRef Hertwig, R., Barron, G., Weber, E. U., & Erev, I. (2004). Decisions from experience and the effect of rare events in risky choice. Psychological Science, 15, 534–539.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hills, T., & Hertwig, R. (2010). Information search and decisions from experience: do our patterns of sampling foreshadow our decisions? Psychological Science, 21, 1787–1792.CrossRef Hills, T., & Hertwig, R. (2010). Information search and decisions from experience: do our patterns of sampling foreshadow our decisions? Psychological Science, 21, 1787–1792.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.CrossRef Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47, 263–291.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rabin, M. (2000). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: a calibration theorem. Econometrica, 68, 1281–1292.CrossRef Rabin, M. (2000). Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: a calibration theorem. Econometrica, 68, 1281–1292.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. (2001). Money, kisses, and electric shocks: on the affective psychology of risk. Psychological Science, 12, 185–190.CrossRef Rottenstreich, Y., & Hsee, C. (2001). Money, kisses, and electric shocks: on the affective psychology of risk. Psychological Science, 12, 185–190.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Rottenstreich, Y., & Tversky, A. (1997). Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: advances in support theory. Psychological Review, 104, 406–415.CrossRef Rottenstreich, Y., & Tversky, A. (1997). Unpacking, repacking, and anchoring: advances in support theory. Psychological Review, 104, 406–415.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House. Taleb, N. N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House.
Zurück zum Zitat Train, K. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Train, K. (2009). Discrete choice methods with simulation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102, 269–283.CrossRef Tversky, A., & Fox, C. R. (1995). Weighing risk and uncertainty. Psychological Review, 102, 269–283.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297–323.CrossRef Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1992). Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 5, 297–323.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547–567.CrossRef Tversky, A., & Koehler, D. J. (1994). Support theory: a nonextensional representation of subjective probability. Psychological Review, 101, 547–567.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Tversky, A., & Wakker, P. P. (1995). Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica, 63, 1255–1280.CrossRef Tversky, A., & Wakker, P. P. (1995). Risk attitudes and decision weights. Econometrica, 63, 1255–1280.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Ungemach, C., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2009). Are probabilities overweighted or underweighted, when rare outcomes are experienced (rarely)? Psychological Science, 20, 473–479.CrossRef Ungemach, C., Chater, N., & Stewart, N. (2009). Are probabilities overweighted or underweighted, when rare outcomes are experienced (rarely)? Psychological Science, 20, 473–479.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Wakker, P. P. (2010). Prospect theory: For risk and ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef Wakker, P. P. (2010). Prospect theory: For risk and ambiguity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Walker, J. L., & Ben-Akiva, M. (2011). Advances in discrete choice: mixtures models. In A. de Palma, R. Lindsey, E. Quinet, & R. Vickerman (Eds.), Handbook in transport economics (pp. 160–187). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Walker, J. L., & Ben-Akiva, M. (2011). Advances in discrete choice: mixtures models. In A. de Palma, R. Lindsey, E. Quinet, & R. Vickerman (Eds.), Handbook in transport economics (pp. 160–187). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Zurück zum Zitat Wilcox, N. T. (2008). Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison. In J. C. Cox & G. W. Harrison (Eds.), Risk aversion in experiments (research in experimental economics 12) (pp. 197–292). Bingley: Emerald.CrossRef Wilcox, N. T. (2008). Stochastic models for binary discrete choice under risk: a critical primer and econometric comparison. In J. C. Cox & G. W. Harrison (Eds.), Risk aversion in experiments (research in experimental economics 12) (pp. 197–292). Bingley: Emerald.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Yechiam, E., Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2005). The role of personal experience in contributing to different patterns of response to rare terrorist attacks. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49, 430–439.CrossRef Yechiam, E., Barron, G., & Erev, I. (2005). The role of personal experience in contributing to different patterns of response to rare terrorist attacks. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49, 430–439.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Beware of black swans: Taking stock of the description–experience gap in decision under uncertainty
verfasst von
André de Palma
Mohammed Abdellaoui
Giuseppe Attanasi
Moshe Ben-Akiva
Ido Erev
Helga Fehr-Duda
Dennis Fok
Craig R. Fox
Ralph Hertwig
Nathalie Picard
Peter P. Wakker
Joan L. Walker
Martin Weber
Publikationsdatum
01.09.2014
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Marketing Letters / Ausgabe 3/2014
Print ISSN: 0923-0645
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-059X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11002-014-9316-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 3/2014

Marketing Letters 3/2014 Zur Ausgabe